RE: [RPRWG] A problem with fairness messages
Robert,
Hope is all going well.
I beg to differ with your statement:
>> We still need to be able to set the TTL to something
>> less than 255 to allow for bidirectional flooding of
>> user data frames.
The DSID proposed by the BAH can be used to specify the
strip point and a distinct flooding bit can be used to
specify the flooding mode. Not only is that possible,
its preferred to having the TTL decrement be messy,
as in frame-type-dependent and run-side-dependent,
as would be the case if used as suggested.
DVJ
David V. James, PhD
Chief Architect
Network Processing Solutions
Data Communications Division
Cypress Semiconductor, Bldg #3
3901 North First Street
San Jose, CA 95134-1599
Work: +1.408.545.7560
Cell: +1.650.954.6906
Fax: +1.408.456.1962
Work: djz@xxxxxxxxxxx
Base: dvj@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-stds-802-17@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>[mailto:owner-stds-802-17@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Anoop Ghanwani
>>Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 9:46 AM
>>To: 'Castellano, Robert'; Anoop Ghanwani; 'Necdet Uzun '
>>Cc: ''John Lemon' '; ''stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx' '; Komal Rathi
>>Subject: RE: [RPRWG] A problem with fairness messages
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Bob,
>>
>>This discussion only applies to fairness messages.
>>
>>-Anoop
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Castellano, Robert [mailto:RCastellano@xxxxxxxxx]
>>> Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 9:46 AM
>>> To: 'Anoop Ghanwani'; 'Necdet Uzun '
>>> Cc: ''John Lemon' '; ''stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx' '; Komal Rathi
>>> Subject: RE: [RPRWG] A problem with fairness messages
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am just catching up on this thread.
>>>
>>> Is the TTL being set to 255 just for congestion control
>>> messages or also data frames in general. We still need
>>> to be able to set the TTL to something less than 255 to
>>> allow for bidirectional flooding of user data frames.
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>>
>>> robert
>>